THE SUMNER ESPLANADE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXIV, Issue 13888, 24 October 1905, Page 6

THE SUMNER ESPLANADE.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —As many persons in Sumner and elsewhere are interested in the proposal to form an esplanade at Sumner, and as there appeal’s to be some misunderstanding among many both as to the intentions of the Borough Council and as to the position between the Council and the Lyttelton Harbour Board, I beg permission to offer, through the medium of your columns, some explanation oh these matters. On the assumption that the distance between high-water mark and the frontages of private properties was about three and a half chains, it was suggested that the Council might sell a strip one chain in width adjoining the private properties to the own ere of the said properties, and while thus obtaining a portion of the funds for the work would still have a sufficient width above high-water mark to form a two-chain esplanade. The Council’s engineer was of/the opinion that it would be inadvisable to extend the work so far seawards, and therefore the Council disapproved of the suggestion to sell any of the area. Adjoining the properties is a. portion of the beach over which the Council has absolute power, without interference from the Harbour Board. This is a strip which varies from a chain to a chain and three-quarters in width. This strip I will call “ A.” Adjoining it, seawards, is a second strip, which I will call “ B,” which varies from a: chain to three chains in width, in- respect of which the Commissioner of Crown lands is about to issue to the Sumner Council a title in fee simple, subject, however, to the Lyttelton Harbour Board having.the right to assume occupation and use of the same if required for harbour purposes. Therefore, should the, Council construct an esplanade of two chains in width (which it has full legal power to do) such esplanade would occupy the whole of strip “ A ” and a small portion of strip “B.” It should be thoroughly understood that the Harbour Board has not the power to prevent the ,construction of an esplanade, nor has it expressed any such intention, hut has merely reminded the Sumner Council of its statutory power to assume use and occupation of the strip “B” above mentioned, and has declined to agree to relinquish or diminish its legal rights in any way. It is highly improbable that the Harbour Board will require the use of any portion of the esplanade for a groat many years to come, and many never require it, and if it should require it, it is probable that the manner of its usage will not interfere with the public enjoyment of the esplanade, and, therefore, I do not think that the people of Sumner should allow this remote possibility to deter them from proceeding with the work. This opinion may not he shared by others, and to remove the possibility of objections by the Sumner ratepayers in this matter, it was suggested that the Harbour Board should agree to pay value for such portion of the esplanade improvement as it should find itself under the necessity of occupying. The Harbour Board did not agree to this suggestion, but surely it could well afford to do so, seeing that the improvements will be of the nature of reclamation, and as such would probably be of much value to the Board if it should need to occupy the same, and seeing also that the hundreds of thousands per annum of visitors to Sumner are almost entirely drawn from the population represented by (lie Board. The proposed work would add greatly to the enjoyment of these numberless visitors, yet the position of the Harbour Board may deter the ratepayers of Sumner from proceeding with the project.—l am, etc.,' FREDERICK PRATT. Sumner, October 23, 1905.